Himanshu Kumar @ Shubham Kumar @ Himanshu @ Shubham v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53666 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-432 Year-2017 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna ====================================================== Himanshu Kumar @ Shubham Kumar @ Himanshu @ Shubham, Son of Late Satyadev Singh Resident of Village-Mohanpur, P.S.-Mufassil (Begusarai), District-Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur Mr. Malay Kumar Choudhary Mr. Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nityanand, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gardanibagh P.S. Case No.432 of 2017, for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner fired upon the daughter of the informant causing serious fire arm injury upon her.

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and daughter of the informant were in love and the daughter of the informant was not ready to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53666 of 2019(3) dt.25-11-2019 2/2 marry with the petitioner, as such he allegedly fired upon her. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to the fact that he was in love with the daughter of the informant.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that four fire arm injuries have been found on the person on the victim and as such the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of firing upon the daughter of the informant and the four injuries have been found on the body of the victim, as such I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

However, after completion of period of seven months of custody from today, the petitioner may renew his prayer for regular bail.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T